Thoughts on the CSB

Translators like to claim their work is "essentially literal" because that method is the best. But some translators like to rewrite the text to make it conform to their presuppositions.

Folks, note with all these efforts to justify paraphrasing God's word, no specific examples are given, such as this verse must be adulterated in order to translate it. No verse will be forthcoming, the whole claim is bogus.

 

The CSB is a better translation in my opinion than the ESV because it does not contain obvious agenda driven mistranslation to support bogus doctrine. Therefore it is fine for use as a comparison bible when doing bible study.

 

The majority of BBers that have reasonably good reading comprehension would say that your words above present a view far different from my actual words. Another false portrait from Van. But Van Gogh you are not. ;-)

 

See, that's the kind of stuff you have the habit of saying. You put down actual translators and try to elevate yourself to a position that is entirely unwarranted. It's silly of you Van.

 

You used to list the ESV as one of your favorite translations. Were you wrong then or wrong now?

What supposedly "bogus doctrine" does the ESV promote? That's a serious charge which mods need to delete. You have a lot of nerve Van. You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

I agree with the above except I would have said dead idioms. I like translations that are idiomatic.

"It is best at least to make sense in the text and put the scholarly caution in the margin, rather than to make nonsense in the text and offer excuse in the margin." (Nida and Tabor The Theory and Practice of Translation p.30)

 

I have heard this claim from multilpe people. None have demonstrated such claims with valid arguments.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

Does anyone see any on topic contribution to the subject of the thread?
Does anyone see off topic insults, addressing a poster by name?
Does anyone see an effort to change the subject?

Now returning to topic:
The CSB is a better translation in my opinion than the ESV because it does not contain obvious agenda driven mistranslation to support [Edit]. Therefore the CSB is fine for use as a comparison bible when doing bible study.

Still waiting for anyone to post a verse that could not be best translated using word for word translation philosophy methodology! On the other hand plenty of verses have been posted in this thread showing that functional non-equivalence occurs in the less formal translations.

 

All translators have a presupposition that effects there products. You and I lean towards the formal. Therefore our presupposition would demand a more formal rendering. Trying to focus on finding a word that best fits the word in a more "literal" meaning-- which the author used. Others on here have a presupposition that puts a higher priority on reader reception, therefore they will favor a more mediating or functional rendering. This type of translation can be more meaningful to a large % of the population. Especially for those without the tools or desire to do word studies. We can't deny that we all have some presupposition when it comes to translation.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

 

I have posted many examples in past threads. If you want to actually learn of actual problems on this other topic, start a conversation with me.

 

Again, still waiting for someone to post a verse that demonstrates a need for loose translation. Robert Frost wrote poetry and when he read "free verse" he said that it was like playing tennis with the net down.
The bible says we should not adulterate God's word. If you look at 1 Corinthians 6:5, you will see several modern translations that needlessly adulterated the text.

 

Maybe I misses something, but what "modern translation" adulterates the text of 1 Corinthians 6:5?

Here is a list of generally accepted translations.

Which "adulterates" the text?

New International Version
I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers?

New Living Translation
I am saying this to shame you. Isn't there anyone in all the church who is wise enough to decide these issues?

English Standard Version
I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers,

Berean Study Bible
I say this to your shame. Is there really no one among you wise enough to arbitrate between his brothers?

Berean Literal Bible
I say this to you for shame. Thus is there not one wise man among you who will be able to decide in between his brother?

New American Standard Bible
I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren,

King James Bible
I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?​

NET Bible
I say this to your shame! Is there no one among you wise enough to settle disputes between fellow Christians?

New Heart English Bible
I say this to move you to shame. Is not there even one wise man among you who would be able to decide between his brothers?

Jubilee Bible 2000
I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brothers?

King James 2000 Bible
I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?

American King James Version
I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brothers?

American Standard Version
I say this to move you to shame. What, cannot there be found among you one wise man who shall be able to decide between his brethren,

CSB
I say this to your shame! Can it be that there is not one wise person among you who is able to arbitrate between fellow believers?


​

 

ANY translation has its problem verses though, correct?

 

Would say that both of them are very good translation, and both are suitable for use!

 

Trust me in this van, NONE of those on the translation teams for Csb/Esv/Nas etc were trying to get the Bible to speak what they wanted it do, all of them were attempting to get the message from God intended to us today!

 

You forfeited my ability to trust you when you repeatedly misrepresented my views. I ask you questions and you do not answer.

 

Still waiting for on topic posts concerning CSB verses that seem better than other versions, or seem worse than other version. And still waiting for verses that need to be translated loosely, but they cannot be translated using the word for word philosophy methodology.
Could it be all these functional equivalent

The versions with the red text have changed the meaning of word in Greek which refers to brothers or brothers and sisters, or siblings. Note that these adulterations loose our common connection as siblings of Christ. And the rewrite of God's word was unnecessary and wrong.

 

Actually, beside "brothers, or brethren," the original language supports the use as members of the same religious community, fellow believers of the same religious community, and folks who have the same inheritance or nationality.

 

Somehow the on line lexicons overlooked your assertion that the original language supports members of the same religious community." Do you have a link to that?

 

Well the Bible no matter what version is the same yesterday, today, and forever. No matter what translation there.